Thread Number: 18105
Europe to cut power of vacuum cleaners to save energy
[Down to Last]

Vacuumland's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 197938   8/29/2012 at 08:17 (2,826 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

Not sure if everyone has seen this. It came up in another discussion, but I thought it deserved it's own thread. See link.



Post# 197940 , Reply# 1   8/29/2012 at 08:28 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture

Finally, some good news.

I had to chuckle when I read the heading: "The cleanliness of Britain's homes is being threatened by European bureaucrats who want to reduce the power of vacuum cleaners in a bid to cut energy use."

How the hell (pardon the blasphemy) is it threatened !?

This is a damned good thing because it means manufacturers (mainly ones making bagless Vacuum Cleaners) will have to design them MUCH better to achieve acceptable suction power. In fact, I don't even know if it will be possible to have a bagless Vacuum Cleaner for 1960s wattages...

This could turn out even better than expected and actually end the bagless market and return to low wattage bagged cleaners. THAT would be something worth celebrating... Or not, depending on the side you take on that everlasting debate.

You know something, I haven't been happier all month!

Thank you for posting this Chris, YOU'VE MADE MY DAY! :)

Post# 197944 , Reply# 2   8/29/2012 at 08:35 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Having read that article again, I now realise how inexperienced (there is no other word for it I'm afraid) the "experts" are.

They say it will reduce the effectiveness for picking up fine dirt... Umm, no! Not with a good brush roll. And as for cylinders, well, do what America does and fit Power Nozzles.

All manufacturers need to do is look back on history and see how Hoover got the dust out of carpets back in 1908 - BEATING.

Of course the method would have to be changed slightly to make it compatible on glued down carpets, but it could be done.

I'm just glad my carpets aren't glued so I can use my good old agitators for dust removal, even if it does let some back into the air via the poor filtration, or even better use my Turbopower 2 and 1000 with the activators which work nigh on as good AND have good filtration.

Post# 197953 , Reply# 3   8/29/2012 at 08:55 (2,826 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

I think it's a little excessive, but I agree with the principal. I'd rather see a universal cap of 1000w for everything.

Post# 197957 , Reply# 4   8/29/2012 at 09:05 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Indeed, 1000W would be a good number.

Post# 197967 , Reply# 5   8/29/2012 at 09:32 (2,826 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture
Its all political propaganda, the EU is full of it, they love to control. The vacuum company's will rebel and so will consumers.Consumers like power. Vacuum's, cars all the same, thats why BMW 3 series outsells the Ford mondeo in the UK, Power.

I tell you what though, if they do manage to make it law you will be able to make a nice living turbo charging vacuumcleaners.

Post# 197968 , Reply# 6   8/29/2012 at 09:34 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Do you mean fitting larger motors Gareth ?

Post# 197969 , Reply# 7   8/29/2012 at 09:35 (2,826 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture
oh yea

Post# 197971 , Reply# 8   8/29/2012 at 09:37 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture

Post# 197975 , Reply# 9   8/29/2012 at 09:44 (2,826 days old) by dustin (Jackson, MI)        

dustin's profile picture
I don't know if you have them over there, but a few years ago, Eureka (Electrolux) was selling the "Enviro Vac", a lightweight bagless upright that they claimed had the same cleaning power as a normal upright. If I remember correctly, it only used 8.5 amps (99% of new vacs over here use 12 amps). I never had the oppertunity to use one though. Also, Bissell is using lower wattage motors in their low end uprights sold at walmart, I think 10 amps.

Post# 197976 , Reply# 10   8/29/2012 at 09:46 (2,826 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture
We already get allot of it, however what I do is fit a curved turbine ametek motor into older vacuums to increase the airflow, it works a treat. Customers always ask us to fit a more powerfull motor IE wattage but often the motor we fit uses less wattage than the original one but sucks better

Post# 197977 , Reply# 11   8/29/2012 at 09:48 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
What is 8.5 Amps in watts ?

Post# 197979 , Reply# 12   8/29/2012 at 09:53 (2,826 days old) by dustin (Jackson, MI)        

dustin's profile picture
I *think* on 110-120 volts 8.5 amps comes out to 850 watts, 100 watts per amp. I may be wrong.

Post# 197980 , Reply# 13   8/29/2012 at 10:09 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That sounds good to me Dustin.

Post# 197981 , Reply# 14   8/29/2012 at 10:25 (2,826 days old) by richardlee1985 (Swindon, Wiltshire)        

richardlee1985's profile picture
2200 watts is ridiculous for any vacuum cleaner. I've noticed a lot of 1100-1200w machines starting to appear recently.

Post# 197991 , Reply# 15   8/29/2012 at 11:05 (2,826 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"2200 watts is ridiculous for any vacuum cleaner" Don't tell Ryan (sebo_fan) that! :)

Post# 197999 , Reply# 16   8/29/2012 at 11:28 (2,825 days old) by Vacbear58 (Sutton In Ashfield & London)        
All this talk

vacbear58's profile picture
Will give my Miele Revolution (all 2200watts + powered brushroll) an inferiority complex. Oh, and Jamie remind me please, just how many bagless models do Miele make?


Post# 198002 , Reply# 17   8/29/2012 at 11:37 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
What do you mean Al ?

Post# 198003 , Reply# 18   8/29/2012 at 11:37 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Of course the answer is none, I meant what is your sarcastic meaning, since there obviously is one.

Post# 198040 , Reply# 19   8/29/2012 at 15:40 (2,825 days old) by borusa (Edinburgh)        

borusa's profile picture
Europe love to legislate on everything - you would not believe the regulations. Deal with a lot with work but can't argue with the principle.

Post# 198051 , Reply# 20   8/29/2012 at 17:55 (2,825 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

"Consumers like power". Only because that is what they have been conditioned into thinking. I agree that the power consumption of vacuum cleaners is at stupid-watts now. People have been told that more watts equates to better cleaner. They now need to be re-educated so they can understand what it watt. Terrible pun and I beg your forgiveness. But really, any fool would realise that a car which is capable of travelling only at 120mph would not be a useful tool to have on a day to day basis and the same thinking needs to be ploughed into vacuum cleaning.

I did smile to myself (first time today, probably this week) when I read those comments which James Dyson made, when he said "developing new technology required to improve efficiency can take years". What utter, utter nonsense. One only has to take apart a few Electrolux cylinders from the 1970's period and analyse what made them so darn good, and then recreate it for todays market.

Post# 198069 , Reply# 21   8/29/2012 at 19:27 (2,825 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Um, well it isn't law yet and I sincerely hope it won't become law, because quite frankly the whole idea is preposterous. I quote from a previous thread here - if a modern day rapid boil kettle uses 3000 watts in one go or an electric hob that uses far greater watts, aren't these kinds of appliances used every day or both in tandem compared to a vacuum cleaner? What is stopping consumers from using a stove kettle on the hob to save money instead of using a separate jug kettle? What is stopping buyers from replacing their standard hob with a lower cost to run efficient induction hob?


I think you'll find that the reason exists because of convenience, faster boiling and a far safer approach compared to the metal, non-heat insulated, liable to boil over non-stopping stove kettle. As for the hobs, owners will keep what they have instead of shelling out for something more technologically advanced, uses less power but you still have to buy the pots and pans that can actually be used on the darn thing first!


Therefore one would assume that if consumers are using up more electricity than they should be, they should be coerced with brands appliances sporting the older, longer to boil 2.2 kilowatts/2200 watts for kettles and hobs. Still, some would argue that 2200 watts are still too high.


Frankly I think the proposal is only just a proposal - the newspaper report dates back to 2010 - so in two years, what manufacturer has brought out a vacuum with the suggested wattage?? Who has taken notice? Not many brands as far as I can see. And, yes there was an Electrolux Powerlite Eco upright (light green, I had one and it cost more than the 1700 watt version when it appeared) with 800 watts maximum. The trouble I found with that vacuum is that it ran out of suck with the synthetic dust bags that it was required to be fitted with and another reason it didn't sell was simply for the fact that it was priced more than the normal version and consumers weren't interested.


Electrolux have just brought out a new upright for 2012, the Air Excel Lite and it sports a 1300 watt motor. Still, for a bagless upright with the Vax Mach Air sporting 1200 watts, it is a step in the right direction - even if Sebo have been offering 1300 watts as its highest in their upright ranges - for more than 10 years with the X1.1 having 1150 watts. The older X1 A has 850 watts to 1000 watts.


About the only other brand I know who still sell upright vacuums with low watts is Oreck - or are there any others in the UK other than going down the Vintage route? My Black and Decker mains corded hand held with optional floor tool and extension pipes (thus allowing a mini upright vac by design and look) sports 900 watts and it's bagless. Maybe that's the way brands will eventually go.


In the meantime my daily driver is still my newly bought Gtech SW02 cordless sweeper - its soft bristles and eager power only requiring charged over night per 2 weeks ensures I have enough power to get around the home. It uses 25 watts to anyone interested! Thus when the vacuum gets taken out, there really isn't much to clean up as a result and only requires to be taken out two to three times a month.


Jamie - your posts are being monitored, Id be careful with what you say.



This post was last edited 08/29/2012 at 20:09
Post# 198106 , Reply# 22   8/30/2012 at 03:12 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"Jamie - your posts are being monitored, Id be careful with what you say." Is that a threat Ryan ?

Indeed Benny, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out what made vintage vacuums so good for so little watts.

It was simple, for a cylinder you had a hose that went into a bag that had a big motor with big fans behind it. Big in every way except power, they only had around 500 watts give or take.

Same with uprights only they used the dirty fan method which could still be used today in a hygienic way with HEPA bags such as certain Kirby models use.

They say you have to move with the times, but why ? When things are fine there is no need to try and improve them.

Ever heard of the phrase "if it ain't broke don't fix it ?" ?

That applies here, vacuum manufacturers are trying to fix non-existent problems by increasing the wattages over and over and over.

What they need to do is turn them down and make the technology better so as to not require a massive power plant for a motor.

Post# 198113 , Reply# 23   8/30/2012 at 03:54 (2,825 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Its not a threat Jamie, it's a fact.


If you had a cylinder vacuum now like the vintage ones with sleigh rails, very little else other than a main floor head and a hose, would you be happy? I don't think you would - infact I think you'd pine for your Tango since that's all you appear to do.


Benny made a fair point earlier - consumers have been conditioned to buying high power - but they've also been conditioned to buy other features that outweigh the justification of keeping to the old formula they had such as:


A larger dust bag, more features on board such as an auto cord rewind system, tools on board, power settings, different cleaning tools, far more compact designs, easier to store, lighter to carry, telescopic height adjustable tubing, different filter options, longer cords and then different floor heads.


Higher power only forms part of that marketing strategy to pull the buyers in. I don't think you could easily live with vintage cylinder vacuums so easily without at least some, if not all of the modern features given above. 


I am puzzled as to why you think brands are over complicating things by increasing wattages. All they are doing is increasing power - in the same way that virtually every other product or lifestyle product like car brands do - but unlike other appliances I've pointed out - there really isn't a problem with power usage and high power vacuums - not when kettles, ovens and hobs are used every day.


Until brands lower the output on kettles, hobs and stoves, I don't see the problem in producing high motors on vacuums. That fact seems to have passed you by - and a few others on here.

Post# 198116 , Reply# 24   8/30/2012 at 04:13 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Actually, I would be happy Ryan, as less is more with me.

I can appreciate luxury and lots of features, but there is a certain attraction to something so simple yet so effective.

By the way, I don't pine for my Tango. You've mentioned your Sebo much more often than I have my Tango, so I'd say you are pining for it, but hey, I'm not getting pulled into such childish antics.

Simple fact is Ryan, people managed to clean their homes just fine back in the 50s and 60s with the cylinders of that day and age. I'm not saying we should go back to being that basic, but I'm saying manufacturers should take a leaf out of the book of history and see that people were once motivated to buy something because of reliability, durability, simplicity and most of all, magnificent customer service in the way of in home servicing, in home pre-purchase testing etc...

These days you go down to Argos and pick up a 2200W Vacuum Cleaner which will scream at you until your ears bleed and break down in 6 months.

I never said that brands were complicating things by increasing motor wattage, what I said is that they are putting them up and up thinking that they are making things better.

Maybe in your eyes they are, but in mine they certainly aren't.

If only they could think "right, lets make something that has a quiet and efficient motor with such a design as to allow it to be just as effective as anything else on the market". But, I doubt they ever will, because there is no money in trying to convince people that wattage isn't everything, so they will "go with the flow".

A flow which is ever deteriorating and giving consumers the absolute wrong idea about effectiveness and power of a Vacuum Cleaner.

The fact is, the two do not influence one another.

Post# 198127 , Reply# 25   8/30/2012 at 05:44 (2,825 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Mmm yes, all very well if we lived in a solid economy but we no longer do - you can't buy reliable or durable appliances these days unless you pay through the nose for it - and even then the durability isn't as good as it once was - case in point, Miele vacs are very fragile - I managed to damage one last week when I picked up dry, rotten milk in dry, solid form on a hard floor that has stank out my Active Air Clean filter as well as completely destroyed the hose and has left a horrible smell through the motor.


"Such childish antics." Oh please, listen to yourself - or rather check the posts where you continuously harp on on about your Tango, Hoover Ranger, Philips and everything else you seem to own. Oh and by the way, the Sebo X1 1000 watt motor has a 67 dbl noise level compared to your Hoover TP2 Auto sense 800 watt motor at 71dbl. How can that be, a higher powered motor is quieter than a lower powered motor - and the Sebo doesn't have extra sound insulation either!


You're quite happy to recognise that people from the '50s had basic vacuums and you don't want a return to that, but you want the same kind of customer service, durablity and reliability that the machines of the day - AND THEIR SUCCESSORS thereafter - makes me wonder if you are actually from this time period! Have you got a Tardis? Are you in the right century? Sadly, as consumers we have moved away from all of those concerns - why else do we have disposable pens, disposable shavers, plastic oil based carry bags compared to the woven tweed bags (and Hessian etc), food bags compared to tinfoil or wrapping your sandwiches in grease proof like paper? Because times have moved on - we've been living in a disposable society since the 1970's, possible helped and literally fuelled along by the oil crisis.


Effectiveness with any cleaner is in the name - it has to be effective to clean well - thus power is an absolute essential when it comes to how effective the vacuum cleaning can actually be - however it is in how the power is used that defines effective cleaning - and that aspect is lost on future buyers. You're not dealing with a car here, where a lower engine produces a higher fuel efficiency compared to a 2.0 or 3.0 engine. It's just a vacuum cleaner - its just a cleaning device.


Post# 198129 , Reply# 26   8/30/2012 at 06:49 (2,825 days old) by Turbo500 (West Yorkshire, UK)        

turbo500's profile picture

not to divert away from the topic, but is that a proper cyclonic vacuum from Electrolux??

Post# 198135 , Reply# 27   8/30/2012 at 07:23 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well Ryan, pot call kettle black.

You are wrong there, my two Turbopowers are both 1000W versions (1994 TP1000 & 1999 TP2).

On an off topic note, I feel slightly sick after reading about that milk.

Two things churn my stomach - rotten cheese and rotten milk.

Post# 198142 , Reply# 28   8/30/2012 at 09:41 (2,825 days old) by rugsucker (Elizabethton TN)        
power consumption

I have noticed that the average customer wants to see a 'big' number written on the vac but has no idea what it means as with the lady who called for bags and told me I would know which vac it was as it said eighty five amps!--I recall a Royal sales folder that quoted someone at a huge Las Vegas hotel saying that to switch to efficient lower amp vacs saved thousands on monthly electric bills.

Post# 198144 , Reply# 29   8/30/2012 at 10:09 (2,825 days old) by richardlee1985 (Swindon, Wiltshire)        

richardlee1985's profile picture
How long will it be before we start seeing 3000w vacuum cleaners. They'll be so powerful you won't be able to manoeuvre them! Ha.

Post# 198146 , Reply# 30   8/30/2012 at 10:14 (2,825 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well 3KW is the limit for a 13 AMP BS 1363 plug & flex so I'm just waiting for it, shouldn't be too much longer unfortunately.

Post# 198149 , Reply# 31   8/30/2012 at 10:42 (2,825 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

No pot calling here, Jamie - if its 1000 watt version, its rated at 71 to 73dbl - still too loud!

Post# 198150 , Reply# 32   8/30/2012 at 10:44 (2,825 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Well you'll know yourself Richard - that Miele and Sebo have different rating plates - their machines may be advertised as having 2200 watts but the rating plate usually states lower. 

Post# 198188 , Reply# 33   8/30/2012 at 14:19 (2,824 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I can fully appreciate that other factors over the years have drawn customers to newer cleaners, but as the topic was (and I do stress the use of the word 'was') about wattages, it was this aspect I spoke about. I wouldn't say consumers had been conditioned into the likes of telescopic tubes, attachments, and power controls in quite the same way, as these are very much a physical thing, something which people can look at and touch and experience for themselves. They can then decide if this added feature is what they need.

With wattage, it is much simpler. You can't see it, you can't really measure the benefits of it on a factual scale, so the consumer simply trusts in what they think they know and what they've been given to understand, which is that big is better. Notice that Dyson cleaners have never really stated their wattage on anything but the rating plate. I am cutting myself some slack here as I am quite sure someone with a keener eye and better memory will be able to say there was such an attempt at such and such a time, but I speak in the very general sense when I say Dyson have never really advertised the wattages. People still bought the cleaners though, despite have relatively low wattage motors. It is though they are immune from it; as though somebody somewhere has suggested that when choosing a new vacuum cleaner one should purchase a Dyson, then failing one should automatically hunt down the cleaner with the most watts.

I would suggest that the Hoover Freedom 1000 and Electrolux 345 cylinders, and Hoover Turbopower 2 & 3 would be good choices for an manufacturer to study in great detail to decipher what really makes for a good, all round vacuum cleaner. Please note these three models I refer to are not exhaustive, they are just what comes to mind. It's not an attempt to open a debate about every Tom, Dick, & Dyson ever made.

Post# 198190 , Reply# 34   8/30/2012 at 14:24 (2,824 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I have to suggest that the day of a 3kw vacuum cleaner will never arrive, for two reasons. One, the cost of fitting flex which was both thick enough to take the loading for long periods and long enough to use would be rather high, and the flex itself rather bulky to use and store in a domestic situation.

Two, I would suggest the heat from the motor would be too great for the plastic casings to comfortably withstand it. Mouldings and casings would have to be minimises and with that comes an increase in noise. In 1994 the Hoover Alpina was being marketed as a machine which was both powerful and quiet. But in designing this cleaner, ventilation had clearly been overlooked and a good deal of early models used to regularly overheat.

Post# 198195 , Reply# 35   8/30/2012 at 15:20 (2,824 days old) by whirlpolf ()        
thank God finally someone is thinking

Without even having read the article:

In the good old days, vacs had like 400 to 600 watts and they were cleaning reasonably well even compared to today's machines.
Then the 80s wattage race came up in the commercials, the miraculous 1 kW being THE holy grail.
Then came Dyson with his patents, blocking all other manufacturers from producing a well-thought-of multiple cyclone. Consequence: They would place their 1400 watts China screamer motors into plastivacs with a cardboard-zigzag wannabe cyclone (Dirt Devil crap vacs et al.)
Consequence: All cheapo vacs went from silly zigzag paper cyclone on 1 kW to silly zigzag cyclone with 2 kW.
Major companies having noticed that went from 2000 w to 2200 or even 2400 here (Bosch etc.).

I am really sick of this cheap-cheap-thrift-bingo race.
Do it the Lux way or the any other good vacuum company way:
A REAL filtration system (no cough-yourself-to-death plastic pans, hello Mr. Dyson) or just devise some good water basin thing (but withOUT rusting of the motor shaft, hello Rainbow!)
A real motor (best magnetic field dispersion through the iron, no China pressed cheapo screamer stuff)
A real good hose, tight gaskets, best swivel joints.
A really good nozzle (fastest air stream close to the surface, no air leaks when on carpets)
Calculation of the best "workability point" in the diagram:
No airstream = highest vacuum load per kig
Full airstream = lesser kg per litres of air stream but highest litres per minute.
Somewhere in between there must be THE working point for any of that specific vacuum cleaner.
No trust in thrift shreaking get-me-deaf plastivacs.

Coming from here any fantastic vacuum cleaner can be made with some mediocre 600 to 900 watts.
Look at Kirby, Lux, Vorwerk and all the others that really CARE about their profession and take pride in diligence to details. It is not about vacuum "brokers" but about "manufacturers" (manum = Latin for hand, factum = made, so hand made)
Even if hand-made may not be practical today, I still request any "manufacturer" to have a "hands-on" mentality regarding customer's needs. Period.

Post# 198200 , Reply# 36   8/30/2012 at 15:51 (2,824 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I like that. I would also like to see consumers educated into understanding that it is only really carpet cleaning which requires a reasonable amount of suction power. For all other tasks, like hard floors and surfaces, it is just not needed. In fact, I can recall telling a good deal of my customers who had mostly hard surfaces that the concept of a cleaner like a Dyson which does not lose power was completely wasted on them as power was not what they needed to clean their homes. They would of course benefit from the bagless side of it, but that wasn't the principle reason James Dyson made the cleaner as far as I can see.

Post# 198208 , Reply# 37   8/30/2012 at 16:51 (2,824 days old) by FantomLightning (Ohio)        
Really Ryan?

You're complaining about Miele now because you decided to suck up rotten milk in one? Yes I did read that it was dry but thats not something you should be picking up with a vacuum in the first place... Thats not fragility, its user stupidity. But let me guess... You've done the same with a Sebo with no ill effects correct?

Post# 198262 , Reply# 38   8/30/2012 at 17:43 (2,824 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Hoover has the "Greenray" machines.

Although intriguingly, the Purepower Greenray seems to have dematerialised from the Hoover website! (I recently mentioned this in another thread).

I want manufacturers to think carefully and design appropriately. I want a lesser powered upright, but it must agitate the carpet properly and remove grit and hair efficiently.

1000 Watts seems about right for clean air uprights and cylinders. Think of the 1980's Hoover Sensotronics, the 1990's Hoover Turbopower 3 and Electrolux Airstream 1000.

Remember too that twin-stage fans gave way to single-stage fans and ridiculous power consumption. Increasing the diameter of air ducts can improve airflow efficiency too.

I just wish that manufacturers would get off their collective arses and instigate changes on their own initiative!

Post# 198267 , Reply# 39   8/30/2012 at 18:06 (2,824 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Having just visited it looks like low wattage vacuums are available - but strangely they seem to be more expensive to buy than the usual average high wattages.

Post# 198681 , Reply# 40   9/2/2012 at 08:35 (2,822 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        
Really Ryan??

sebo_fan's profile picture

Um, I didn't intentionally go to the bother of testing how fragile a vacuum cleaner is by sucking up dried milk - I was cleaning under a fridge freezer, picking up glass fragments from a glass breakage using a suction only vacuum cleaner as MOST WOULD - I wasn't aware that there was anything like the milk under the fridge other than a dry floor to my eye. It was a shock that the Miele's so called "quality" and expensive to buy Active Air Clean filter couldn't hold back the odour. 


If you bother to read my profile you'll see that I like lots of brands - and I've collected a fair few over the last 10 years or so as other members have done on here. 


Ry-Ry - it would appear that is a new upright from Electrolux. They claim that is has no loss of suction, so it probably uses the same filter design as Hoover's Air Volution, Vax etc. I quite like the look with the entire clear bin leading right to the top before the cyclones but then it is similar with Hoover already, Bissell and others.


Whilst I think it would be prudent for brands to look at what has been offered in the past, I think it is high time Hoover brought out a proper Junior range and but more realistically and probably in time, Hoover will do a cheap way out and offer a new bagless Turbo Power upright with an even lower motor to extend their Greenray idea. 


The 'Eco" tag is something that Miele actually thought about a long time ago well before they released their "Ecoline" motors - the budget S2 for example has an intentionally lower 1600 watt motor compared to the 2000 watt motors on their bigger cousins, not just from a marketing point of view. 



Post# 198706 , Reply# 41   9/2/2012 at 12:56 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Talking of using a cylinder on hard flooring, I must say I have never really realised until today that the floor tool on my 2004 Panasonic MC-E8011 is actually very good on hard flooring.

It doesn't fly over it like some do nor does it stick to it.

I used it because there was some flour (amongst lots of other dirt) on the kitchen flooring after my mother's baking last night. Didn't want to clog up a bag with it, so used a bagless that I don't really care about.

Post# 198712 , Reply# 42   9/2/2012 at 13:22 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

I find most suction only floor tools on hard flooring is good until you have to brush up pet hair, or your own hair if you are susceptible to having your hair cut in the kitchen or bathroom. That's when the hair sticks to the bristles.


As for sucking up flour, I've done it myself using a bagless vacuum. You can ignore the filter until the machine eventually runs out of puff and then have to deal with the flour then. Talk about wasted energy there - at least with a dust bag you can physically tap the paper to loosen the powder out and then reuse the bag again.

Post# 198718 , Reply# 43   9/2/2012 at 13:42 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
"or your own hair if you are susceptible to having your hair cut in the kitchen or bathroom." I like you're choice of language there!

As you shall see if you watch my Hoover Junior U1104 video on YouTube I haven't had a hair cut in a while, thank goodness. It is "insulation".

Post# 198720 , Reply# 44   9/2/2012 at 14:18 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

I watched your video already, hoping it would have some performance, but too much talking meant I missed your hair until the very end. 

Post# 198724 , Reply# 45   9/2/2012 at 14:31 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Please Ryan, it IS NOT the same type of "performance" video as that one I sent you... But lets not talk about that here, OK ?

There will be an in action video soon - OF THE VACUUM, OF THE VACUUM!

Post# 198725 , Reply# 46   9/2/2012 at 14:48 (2,821 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture



Just in case you guys didn't know sucking up flour is a very dangerous  thing to do as it is highly explosive, should any get into your motor and be blown out it could explode in a very big way. 

Post# 198728 , Reply# 47   9/2/2012 at 15:00 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture

I think I'll clean those filters out tomorrow.

Post# 198735 , Reply# 48   9/2/2012 at 15:20 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Send me? Sorry I must have missed that. 

Post# 198736 , Reply# 49   9/2/2012 at 15:23 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Check your junk Ryan.

Post# 198769 , Reply# 50   9/2/2012 at 17:32 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Nope, I dont know where you've sent it to..

Post# 198771 , Reply# 51   9/2/2012 at 17:38 (2,821 days old) by anthony (leeds uk)        
high wattage vacuum cleaners

anthony's profile picture
i doubt the 3 killowatt vac will ever happen but if it did it should should have a goverment health warning on rather like a pack of cigarettes EG a picture of a 3 bar electric fire glowing red hot or maybe a pic of an electricity meter whizzing round

Post# 198782 , Reply# 52   9/2/2012 at 19:12 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Do 3kw kettles come with such warnings? Nah. Feast your eyes on this particularly old report that shows usage of a 650 watt vacuum cleaner - compare that to the 4200 watt clothing dryer.



Post# 198783 , Reply# 53   9/2/2012 at 19:14 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Also, I just did a Google check - a 3000 watt vacuum cleaner does appear to be listed. Its a "Vortex Extreme 3000" bagless canister vacuum.




Post# 198786 , Reply# 54   9/2/2012 at 19:41 (2,821 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

A 3kw kettle cannot be compared to a 3kw vacuum cleaner though. The idea of a 3kw kettle with rapid element is that it boils water faster than a standard kettle. It runs at a higher wattage, yes, but for much less time pro-rata. The vacuum cleaner on the other hand is using electricity for as long as it takes to clean the area in question.

Post# 198836 , Reply# 55   9/3/2012 at 02:36 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Indeed Benny.

The only way to get a heating element to a hotter temperature and thus to boil water faster is to increase the wattage (after you've designed it properly), but with a Vacuum Cleaner this idea does not apply.

Post# 198846 , Reply# 56   9/3/2012 at 05:09 (2,821 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture

Just out of interest 3000watt vacuum shave been available for many years with no ill effects , Most commercial twion motor machine use two 1500watt motors. These machines run long hours , sometimes all day. 

 I have one that is now 12 years old and never melted a plug or a cord. 

Post# 198848 , Reply# 57   9/3/2012 at 05:12 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Not quite Benny - you don't normally use a vacuum cleaner every day - and if you do, would 5 minutes suffice compared to the 20 or 30 times a kettle is used daily? Same with a hob, it uses far more electricity from the moment it is heated up, switched on and used. We can discuss how long a vacuum cleaner can be used compared to a hob, a tumble dryer, a washing machine - but then I think we'd be here until doomsday. There's only a select few who choose to vacuum each day compared to those who are tea and coffee mad and need a brew every couple of hours, or new parents who require the washing machine and tumble dryer to be used daily. Lets not also forget the daily appliance that also uses up energy - the fridge/freezer.


Thus, there really isn't much of a justification to lower vacuum cleaner watts - unless the EU are trying to get around brands to lower everything else they produce.


Also JM - kettles with higher elements don't produce hotter water, they just do it faster due the higher power element - if it was the case that rapid boil kettles produced hotter temperatures, brands would have to cease selling the product as boiling water suitable for domestic use has to be at a fixed temperature.



Post# 198849 , Reply# 58   9/3/2012 at 05:13 (2,821 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

No, because the cord will have been such that it can take the loading. What I was saying was that such mains lead would be bulkier than normal for domestic cleaning, and to be long enough to be useful would be costly. One of the reviews of that 3KW sebfan showed us did in fact say the mains lead was short.

Post# 198851 , Reply# 59   9/3/2012 at 05:20 (2,821 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

sebofan, sorry, I didn't make my point clear. The idea of the 3kw kettle is that it gets where it needs to be in the shortest amount of time. The time difference taken to boil a measure of water between it and a standard kettle should not be proportionate, that is to say (and this is just an example using round figures) that if a pint of water took 2 minutes to boil in a 2KW standard kettle, it would not neccesarily mean that a 3KW rapid boil kettle would take 1.5 minutes to do the job (which, if my maths is correct and it may not be, is the pro-rata time between the two kettles). No, the idea is that it should take, say, 1 minute, therefore using more power whilst on, but doing the job so much faster that it uses less electrictiy overall.

Post# 198852 , Reply# 60   9/3/2012 at 05:23 (2,821 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Sebofan, one other thing I must suggest, boiling water has only one temperature, for domestic or commercial applications. The reference made was about a hotter element to heat the water more quickly. I am not sure whether the element is actually 'hotter' per se, or whether it gets hotter faster and thus boils water more quickly.

Post# 198853 , Reply# 61   9/3/2012 at 05:23 (2,821 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Of course, if brands actually stopped putting silly little "go faster" watt numerical decals on their actual products, the EU could just give the brands concerned a rest. But as Benny did point out earlier, we have always been conditioned to obtain a higher power, much faster, quicker kind of a lifestyle, promising that life would be easier, or better, massaged through the idea of going premium. I don't think it can be blamed entirely on vacuum cleaners, but more to the point, the automobile trade where the word "Deluxe" has always been offered as a higher purchase upgrade on optional mods and features, to the present day equivalents of dressing up car models with sporty trim but avoiding the expensive engine options.


Benny - Ive done my own tests compared to using a 2.2 kw 1.7 litre directly against a 3.0 kw 1.7 kettle - there really isn't much of a difference in time - with the 2.2kw, it takes about 2.4 minutes and 1.5 minutes with a 3.0kw. I don't mind either wattage, but I'm far more concerned if the kettle in question has a concealed, flat base element where the kettle's interior can be cleaned out compared to a supermarket cheapy, where most models have a bare element - useless if you live in a hard water/limescale area. 


End of the day though, yes there is a fair justification for owning a vintage vacuum cleaner where lower watts are concerned, but I don't think most members see their vintage collections for that reason alone. I know I never considered my Hoover Junior U1104 to have eco-saving low wattage, and was more concerned about its lack of suck from the tool kit as opposed to its obviously better, instant contact to the floor from its beater bar roller brush. But therein offers the same point I made in my first paragraph to this post - Hoover offered the tool kit as an optional extra and for some Junior models, standard kit - again as consumers we were offered something that supposedly made the machine better - but in my experience, it really made no sense at all.


Post# 198856 , Reply# 62   9/3/2012 at 05:41 (2,821 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Ryan, you did not read what I said correctly, I will quote it for you to re-read:

"heating element to a hotter temperature and thus to boil water faster"

Post# 198942 , Reply# 63   9/3/2012 at 15:50 (2,820 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

That isn't what you are trying to say though, Jamie. You are actually inferring that the greater wattage a kettle has, the hotter the temperature of the water will get to. Both Benny and I point out that temperatures of hot water in kettles have a fixed temperature fit for consumption and/or general use. The higher wattage doesn't heat the water to a hotter temperature = it just aids the boiling process with more speed - same as a vacuum cleaner with a higher suction motor built to cope with sucking out dust more quickly.


I'd also like to point out one little issue that seems to be so easily forgotten. You moan 2100 watts is far too high for a current vacuum cleaner compared to lower watts, yet don't take into consideration that its a cylinder vacuum - but rewind back to 1990 when Hoover's flagship Turbomaster Total System U5096 upright sporting 575 watts compared to the TOL Sensotronic Audio System 300 that had 1200 watts on the machine and a further 300 watts for the electro brush alone - that tops 1500 watts overall with each use. Thus, that's more than double the output of the upright vacuum. Proof that back in the 1990s Hoover cylinder vacuums had too much high power going on, but in reality, it was far easier to use a cylinder vacuum (like it is now) with a longer hose than depending solely on an upright's shorter hose, or even with extended hoses attached, far more compact and safer going with a cylinder vacuum. 


Post# 198950 , Reply# 64   9/3/2012 at 16:21 (2,820 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I was suggesting that in the UK at normal level above sea water, water has only one boiling point.

Post# 198956 , Reply# 65   9/3/2012 at 16:55 (2,820 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
No, I AM NOT Ryan, I am inferring that the hotter the element gets the quicker the water will reach boiling point.

I thought that was blatantly obvious, was it not ?

Post# 198998 , Reply# 66   9/3/2012 at 21:12 (2,820 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Here we go again - do you remember the last time you got a sentence wrong? Can you read it slowly so that you actually understand what you said the first time? "The only WAY to get a hotter temperature and thus to boil water faster," are two very different points and scienfically can't be twinned together in one sentence to say what you mean.


ALL electric kettles have a FIXED Temperature by law!!!! It doesn't matter what element it has in place - higher elements with higher wattages just boil the water faster than the standard 2.2 k, which after the third post you finally concede. 


That is all, there is no change to the temperature of the final product once the kettle reaches its boiling point, meaning that with a 3kw kettle, the final temperature of the just-boiled-water will be the same as the temperature reached in a low wattage kettle. 


Which pretty much sums up the same kind of performance from a low wattage vacuum cleaner compared to a high wattage vacuum cleaner - both will suck up dust and put it into a bag or bin. Consumers have the choice to buy either low or high power appliances - both have their pros and cons - but the low watts these days have moved on from the 1990s and are higher to remain competitive. 

Post# 199049 , Reply# 67   9/4/2012 at 02:57 (2,820 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
I meant the only way to get the ELEMENT hotter and thus boil the water quicker.

Benny seemed to understand it fine enough.

Post# 199606 , Reply# 68   9/6/2012 at 13:04 (2,817 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

So yet again, even if kettles can have lower wattages, most buyers want a quick boil - evidently if a kettle is being used many times a day and far longer than a vacuum cleaner in usage, it really don't damage electricity usage that much if you do own a high power vacuum cleaner. Now that we've passed the kettle comparisons, you only need to consider the fridge/freezer that can use higher power that is an every day essential - yet brands are slow to make these appliances with lower power. Surely then it would stand to reason that if an appliance like a fridge/freezer has high wattage, it would burn up far more electricity than the use of a vacuum cleaner? 


Post# 199609 , Reply# 69   9/6/2012 at 13:08 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I agree with this - my fridge freezer (A Hotpoint FFA97) uses a hell of a lot of energy - its rated at 120W for the motor, and then has a defrost heater as well that comes on each day as its a frost free model. Hard to believe it uses more power than a 100 watt old style light bulb, and the motor is running a hell of a lot on the average day.

Post# 199610 , Reply# 70   9/6/2012 at 13:10 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Then theres my mobile aircon unit - that guzzles power at the rate of 1KWH - the equivalent of 1 bar of an electric fire, and you have these on for hours in the hot weather (When we do actualluy get it lol)

Post# 199616 , Reply# 71   9/6/2012 at 13:21 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
My Lec fridge is 90W and my freezer is 0.6A (don't know what that is in watts).

Neither of which are frost free fortunately/unfortunately depending on what you prefer - more maintenance or more electricity usage.

Post# 199619 , Reply# 72   9/6/2012 at 13:27 (2,817 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

What about electric hobs then? Now, the induction styles which are pretty new and said to be energy efficient is all very well if you just have one hot plate. Yet, the Bosch PIL811T14E induction hob has 8 hot plates and built in, probably satisfying buyers on many levels and for the fact that it looks classy and looks like its up to the job in an expensively fitted kitchen. Total watts? You're looking at 7200 watts. ALL of that would be produced just to switch the darn thing on and use it, even if the newer induction style is a bit like halogen and offers an instant hotness for cooking on. 


One could argue that a hob isn't used every day but like a vacuum cleaner, we can't stipulate how many times a hob versus a vacuum cleaner is going to be used. Electric fitted hobs are just another example of how much total connected power a large appliance can use, however. 


Smaller appliances - the average combination microwave oven will have an 800 to 1000 watt element for the microwave alone compared to the 1300 watt quartz grill  - total added makes 2000 to 2300 watts. Hardly energy efficient there despite combo microwaves sporting energy efficiency ratings. 




Post# 199620 , Reply# 73   9/6/2012 at 13:30 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Thing is though Ryan, isn't it still better to have a low wattage Vacuum Cleaner and high wattage hob rather than a high wattage Vacuum Cleaner and high wattage hob ?

Of course if hobs could be decreased in wattage that would be great, but one is better than none.

Post# 199622 , Reply# 74   9/6/2012 at 13:33 (2,817 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

My point is Jamie, that there is no need to be worried about a vacuum cleaner having low or high wattage - not when there are so many other appliances in the home that are used on a daily, regular basis and have a high wattage anyway to power up just to use the said appliance. Statistically, vacuums aren't used every day even if you yourself feel the need to vacuum every day. If the EU are really worried about appliance wattage and the amount of times they are used, they should really be attacking the larger appliances or appliances that ARE used every day. 


Post# 199624 , Reply# 75   9/6/2012 at 13:42 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

What about tumble driers? my Hotpoint Ulitima CTD80 uses 3000 watts on each cycle, and how often do you use a tumble drier - I dont have much choice as I have no outdoor space or garden to dry clothes and sheets etc.
We can all rave on about energy saving appliances like light bulbs and eco vacs, but the real power guzzlers like tumble drier, kettles, and Fridges dont really get talked about, as if an eco kettle or drier was made, it would take much longer to dry the clothes or boil the water, so ending using just as much energy in the end.

Post# 199626 , Reply# 76   9/6/2012 at 13:47 (2,817 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Precisely Steve! For most people in the west coast of Scotland where it rains almost every day, an electric tumble dryer is an absolute must and as for that JML Dri Buddi, don't even go there - I had two of them and they're absolutely useless unless you constantly dry towels or tea towels and nothing else. Everything else just comes out far too stiff to be worn in an instant. Not all electric airer dryers are bad though - I bought one from a BN store last year under a brand called "Signature," and it had a very similar feel and look to the Dri Buddi without any names on the blue fabric net - yet its super quiet and actually works properly compared to the loud "honk" of the JML product.

Post# 199632 , Reply# 77   9/6/2012 at 14:00 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I tried the economy route with a clothes horse and the cats just ended up pulling the clothes off it and getting hairs all over everything. The only rooms they cant get in are the bathroom and the bedrooms, but there isnt the space in the bedrooms for drying clothes and sheets, and the rooms then get damp as well and the clothes take an eternity to dry. Most of my electricity bill is run up with the fridge freezer, and the tumble drier, and I have a gas hob and gas boiler for hot water.
I am not really that bothered about the input power of the vacuums as I spend about 10 minutes each day using them, and I dont use the high powered cleaners (the Miele S6 or S7) on full power anyway. Most of my Dysons are 1400W and the Henry is less than 1000W on low power which is ample for daily cleaning - even with the airobrush fitted.

Post# 199639 , Reply# 78   9/6/2012 at 14:12 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well talking of tumble dryers I have myself a good low wattage one plus it is vintage too!

An early 80s Bendix 7414 which uses 1900W with the motor and heater.

And anticipating your come back of "but it will take longer to dry", well, I've put t-shirts and trousers in it straight out of the washing machine and in 60 minutes they are done.

Post# 199641 , Reply# 79   9/6/2012 at 14:20 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Yes Jamie, but how big is the drum and how much can it hold on 1 load? The diameter of the drum in my drier is 22 inches - how big is it on your Bendix?
Could it accomodate a 14.5 tog double duvet or 2 pillows?

Post# 199662 , Reply# 80   9/6/2012 at 16:27 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
The Bendix has a 3KG weight rating.

It can fit pillows in and although I've not tried I'm sure it would fit a duvet in.

Post# 199667 , Reply# 81   9/6/2012 at 16:36 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I'm sorry, but I must suggest that the whole idea of electricity consumption has become a little lost in translation here. To speak of refrigeration appliances for one moment first of all, these have long been a silent drain of electricity, but in recent years manufacturers have been forced to make strides in cutting running costs, mainly by redesigning the appliances so that they have much more insulation.

Frost Free freezers once used to guzzle electricity and when energy rating labels were first used, it was quite shocking to see how much power a frost-free appliance would use in comparison to a standard model. I do not have the technical knowledge as to how all this has been refined, but take a look at the ratings for any new frost-free appliance and you will see that energy consumption is at an all time low.

As for heated appliances, I feel to compare a heated appliance to something like a vacuum cleaner is to compare apples with oranges. As we established earlier on, a vacuum cleaner motor can be designed to work more efficiently and at a lower wattages, to produce the same suction as a poor quality high-wattage lampshade. The fact is that for what ever the reason, manufacturers have chose to take the path which they have done. The comparison I make is only the same as me owning a table lamp with a white shade and 40w bulb, against my neighbour next-door owning the exact same lamp but with a dark brown shade and having to use a 60w bulb in an attempt to create the same amount of usable light. I use this example as it is exactly what has happened in our respective homes.

However this is in respect of appliances where they are run consistently and the time take to complete the task -be it vacuuming a carpet or using the lamp to read a book- is entirely at the discretion of the user. A hob, a kettle, a tumble-dryer (at least a sensor model) all require a certain temperature to be achieved and the faster this happens, the more energy is saved overall. I cannot stress the use of the word 'overall' enough, because it is not sufficient to say kettle A runs as 2000 watts, whilst kettle B is 3000 watts, therefore kettle B uses more electricity, because overall (that is to say over periods of time) kettle B runs for a lesser amount of time than the lower wattage alternative. The same applies to a hob; the higher the watts, the quicker it will come up to temperature and thus shut-off until such time that the thermostat cuts back in.

Another example where a watt-for-watt comparison means very little (and this I use now as I know it is a very real source of confusion for a good deal of consumers) is in the way that one could not compare a 2000 watt fan-heater to a 2000 watt oil radiator, as the fan heater will always consume more electricity due to the design of it, that is to say there is nothing inside it to retain heat to continue warming a room, unlike an oil radiator which will retain heat and continue to heat a room even when the heater is off.

Post# 199669 , Reply# 82   9/6/2012 at 16:40 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Well said Benny, I can't fault that.

Post# 199672 , Reply# 83   9/6/2012 at 16:47 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Yes, but on that last point, the oil filled radiator will need to be on for several minutes from startup before its really hot, ie, it takes several minutes to heat the oil up enough to give out the same heat as a convector heater. That several minutes is then given back when the heater is turned off, as it takes several minutes for the oil to cool down again. I hate this fact on a cold winter morning I turn on the oil filled radiator in the bathroom, but have to wait for ages till it has any effect
Convector or fan heaters give instant heat from the moment they are turned on, but stop as soon as they are turned off. Its just that with an oil filled radiator there is that time lag, as the oil absorbs the heat energy, and then as it gives it out after the input power is cut off.

Post# 199675 , Reply# 84   9/6/2012 at 16:53 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
That is a valid point Steve.

I have no oil heaters, but do have an electric fan heater in the fireplace in the living room which is brilliant for a burst of heat in the morning (especially in winter), but as soon as you turn it off the heat dissipates.

Post# 199681 , Reply# 85   9/6/2012 at 17:03 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

And that, friends, was the exact point I was making, that many variables have to be taken into account before judging whether this is this, and that is that. So as has been said, an oil radiator needs to be given time to get to full power, using electricity for the whole time, but then usage drops considerably as the oil is used to heat the room, rather than the heating element itself. As pointed out, downside is the time taken to get to where one needs it to be; the upside is the overall consumption of electricity is lower.

It was of course wrong of me to use this example in a message thread which has already become confused by comparing electrically heated appliances to other types, but I did give credit to all who may be reading to have the understanding that it was written more to show how things can and can't be compared, and how easy it is to get confused when all variables are not taken into account.

Post# 199685 , Reply# 86   9/6/2012 at 17:13 (2,817 days old) by jmurray01 (Scotland)        

jmurray01's profile picture
Life is full of variables Benny. Who said that, if anybody ?

Post# 199690 , Reply# 87   9/6/2012 at 17:23 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I am wondering why the dirty fan cleaners were all but made extinct in this country in favour of the clean air system, where the energy needed was a lot higher. It would be nice to have the choice like they still do in America to buy a clean air or dirty fan system. Dirty fan cleaners are a lot more energy efficient as I worked out earlier, with my Hoover Ranger using only 400W to do a great job. My Kirby doesnt use much more than this either.
Surely they will have to bring back dirty fan cleaners to be able to satisfy the new regulations of power requirements for vacs in the future.

Post# 199694 , Reply# 88   9/6/2012 at 17:34 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

That I think was to accommodate the growing trend to make upright cleaners with on-board tools. Such machines lacked power on clean-fan models as it was, and dirty-fan machines were worse. Filtration also plays a part I feel, as this became a very modern requirement in what seemed like a short space of time. We must also consider that James Dyson had already touted his clean-fan machine around most manufacturers and they must have known that he was about to produce it himself, bearing in mind also that a key feature of the Dyson was also the filtration, so I would also suggest that clean-fan uprights became the name of the game so as to keep ahead of forthcoming competition.

Post# 199703 , Reply# 89   9/6/2012 at 17:53 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

But if those regulations in the opening post do become law (god help us if they do) what are the vac manufacturers going to do? Only the likes of Kirby and Oreck are going to be able to meet the requirements as they are both dirty fan, and they are both American cleaners. Even the Numatic Henry would fall foul of the rules, and its hardly a power guzzler. I think the hose suction on my Kirby is more than satisfactory, and it operates my 32mm turbo tool well enough to pick up cat hairs from my sofas.
A major rethink on filtration would have to occur, as most HEPA filters restrict airflow quite seriously. Kirby now produce the Hepaflow bags which I use in my Kirby, and these are HEPA complaint on a dirty fan cleaner.

Post# 199705 , Reply# 90   9/6/2012 at 18:05 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well to start, I can't see it happening. Any reduction in motor wattage would have to be started by a manufacturer who was both happy to fly the somewhat controversial flag and also ride out the storm. Then others would follow IF it worked.

Reducing the wattage and maintaining good power is easy. I said it earlier, that the Electrolux and Hoover cylinders packed a punch, despite being only 750 - 1000 watts. This was because a lot of thought went into the design of the motor and also the design of the cleaner. Indeed James Dyson went to great lengths to say how the DC03 had a 700w motor but also had the same suction level as the 1200w DC01, and then again advertised how redesigning the tubes and ducts on the DC04 gave even more suction power from a 1200w motor. So it can be done.

At 1000w, the Hoover Turbopower 3 is in my mind one of the best examples of cleaner which really had it all covered. The only downside I found was the effort needed to move it round. A rethink of the wheels and a little more might have made for an almost perfect bagged cleaner.

Post# 199711 , Reply# 91   9/6/2012 at 18:27 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I would agree with you about the TP3 - I had one several years ago. I wish I still had it as it was a superb cleaner, and with the autosense feature - you could do your vaccing using less power and only increase power when needed. I think more vacs nowadays should use the autosense feature - I know the American model Riccar Radiance does, and wish miele would incorporate it on more of their cleaners - I know they have manual control on most of the cleaner range, some do have auto control, but its not really very effective - at least on my S7 it isnt anyway.
Innovations like autosense should be the fundamental starting point - but unfortunately most multi-cyclonic models need full power all the time to work the cyclonic seperation system.
We could argue that most Dysons dont need as much suction as they actually have, as its pretty difficult to clean curtains etc on full power with a DC07 lol.
On the subject of cleaners being hard to push - I'm sure you've tried to push a Kirby Generation model with the tech drive turned off - you need some might to move them lol

Post# 199715 , Reply# 92   9/6/2012 at 18:44 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I need help to lift a Kirby these days,never mind push one.

Post# 199724 , Reply# 93   9/6/2012 at 19:12 (2,817 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"and the cats just ended up pulling the clothes off it a

Ah yes, pussy cats are a law unto themselves! Ha ha!

Post# 199725 , Reply# 94   9/6/2012 at 19:22 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Yes but I wouldnt swap the little tinkers for the world, they give me a reason to vacuum every day when I come down each morning and theres black fur from one in little clumps in places on my beige carpet, and white fur from the other everywhere else lol. The one thing thats better about cats is that they dont make the hoover bag smell like dogs do.

Post# 199726 , Reply# 95   9/6/2012 at 19:24 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

There's nothing worse than getting a second hand cleaner from a house where they had dogs and neglected to give the vac any attention or servicing. Dysons are particularly bad in the doggy smell area, where all the pet dander gets built up inside the cyclone entry ducting.

Post# 199727 , Reply# 96   9/6/2012 at 19:30 (2,817 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Dyson & the Digital Motor

I wonder when, exactly, we can expect to see the infamous motor grace a full-size machine in the UK?

Japan and America have had full-size cleaners. We only get those battery operated handheld things.

Maybe they can't get it to work inside the confines of the ball?
Maybe they can't produce it in sufficient volume?

Very odd, after crowing about the bloody thing for the past decade!

It is this carrot-waving, then pussyfooting about which frustrates me. I just wish another manufacturer would develop their version of the motor and leave Dyson in a cloud of stoor!

Post# 199730 , Reply# 97   9/6/2012 at 19:34 (2,817 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"I wouldnt swap the little tinkers for the world"

Oh no, don't - they're marvellous beasties! I love the way that they suit themselves with an aloof air.

Post# 199732 , Reply# 98   9/6/2012 at 19:52 (2,817 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I expect Dyson has applied a patent to it, so, like the original dual cyclone system, other manufacturers cant copy it.
I agree that he should patent it as well, as all the other manufacturers laughed at him in the early 90's with his cyclone design and clear dust container - but then all tried to copy it when they realised that people actually liked his design. As I said before - imagine how different things could have been if Dyson got in partnership with Hoover in the 90's, instead of feeling bitter with the other companies and patenting his design and going it alone.
The DDM will come eventually to uprights and canisters - and then no-one else will be able to copy it, and Dyson will regain his top spot from the likes of Miele ( With Which magazine anyhow lol)

Post# 199733 , Reply# 99   9/6/2012 at 20:11 (2,817 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"and then no-one else will be able to copy it"

Hmmm, I don't think that will be the case for much longer. The DDM was mentioned about ten years ago, and the first versions made it into the Dyson DC06 robotic machine (apparently it had a switched reluctance motor), and latterly the Airblade hand dryer. The MkII DDM is in the current handhelds.

And in 2004-ish, Dyson had a press release about a vacuum cleaner with DDM, and the processor which monitored the motor had spare capacity to allow motor characteristic data to warbled down the phoneline to Dyson HQ.

Post# 199765 , Reply# 100   9/7/2012 at 03:15 (2,817 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

As a genuine request for some information, what advantage would the DDM be in a mains powered cleaner?

Post# 199795 , Reply# 101   9/7/2012 at 10:28 (2,817 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Well if you want to call my comparisons to larger appliance a variable, so be it. I just don't agree that such an issue should be made about vacuum cleaners when the larger appliances that have a higher wattage and are used daily should be overlooked when their energy promotions don't really make sense.


My moan is the fact that you're still using up a heck of a lot of power just to activate a large appliance - regardless of the promise of energy ratings - and these energy ratings have provided a source of much debate with most buyers realising that the energy ratings don't really make much sense when the total watts to run an appliance is discovered - that is why, compared to vacuum cleaners and general floorcare appliances, the mere mention of total power watts can be harder to find on large appliances, no matter how much of an energy rating it actually has.  One could therefore say that the energy rating system is therefore flawed - exactly playing to the marketing strings that air watts info on vacuum cleaners provide.


One example that cropped up with me is on my Bosch dishwasher. It comes with a supposedly "eco" tag, and granted it uses up to 14 litres of water compared to a general 16 litres on other rivals,but here's what I found when it came to actual performance:


"...If if you want the quickest wash setting you'll have to select the 33-minute "Quick Wash" function out of the three remaining programs and not all kinds of food ware get cleaned properly. For a start, plastics don't get a chance to dry despite the low energy "Eco-saving" 45 °C temperature. Dishes and cutlery come out touch dry but cookware such as Teflon non-stick pans are damp to the touch and I was surprised to find on some pans, grease had not been cleaned off properly. Glassware on the quick programme however, comes out glinting and clear, and apart from grease, other food stains vanish, leaving cutlery and dishes with a sparkling and clean finish. Aside from the 33-minute Quick Wash function, the latter programs are disappointing in their time duration and strangely less-thought out - for example: 

"Normal 65 °C," lasts a total of 2 hr, 15 minutes, or 2 hr and 5 minutes with the half load additional program selected. 

"Economy 50 °C," takes a shockingly long 3 hr and 34 minutes or 2 hours 34 minutes with the half load additional program selected. Brands these days argue that because the longer a lower temperature wash takes these days, the appliance saves the energy for a longer wash. But if it takes that long on an Eco program, the machine's main wattage is left on for longer. How can that be economical to run>?

"Pre-Rinse" can take up to 15 minutes alone with no option for half load facility. 

"Quick Wash," takes 33 minutes with no option for a half load facility.


Post# 199838 , Reply# 102   9/7/2012 at 14:44 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Well I would say then that in simple terms, the only two factors which can ever be fully considered when painting an overall picture of electricity consumption is the wattage drawn and the time it is drawn for. Both are variable, but when it comes down to it, that is the bottom line. I totally agree that sometimes a saving is not a saving if a particular job is not done to complete satisfaction, such as the excellent dishwasher example Sebo-fan refers to. But again, this comes down not to a reduction in wattages, but in time; in this instance the overall amount of time the heater is on for is reduced, because there is less water to heat. As stated, this can be a false economy, as the results are poor. I expect they may be appealing to some users and not others; after all, satisfaction is only a matter of opinion.

Post# 199876 , Reply# 103   9/7/2012 at 17:37 (2,816 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

The Dyson Digital Motor is supposed to have the best 'power to weight' ratio of any motor. It spins at 100,000 odd revolutions per minute, much faster than brush motors. The fan impeller, curved in three dimensions, is composed of PEEK composite plastic; anything less flies apart.

So supposedly, there should be powerful suction from a compact, lightweight motor. A motor which is supposed to last much longer than the usual brush motors.

Post# 199877 , Reply# 104   9/7/2012 at 17:40 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Hello Rolls. Thanks for explaining that. I do wonder if the advantages of the DDM are better suited to battery-powered cleaning, in effect?

Post# 199879 , Reply# 105   9/7/2012 at 17:54 (2,816 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

I don't think so, although the suction generated is much better than other handhelds. Apparently the battery life is pretty woeful. I had heard that the Dyson DC06 robotic machine only lasted about 10 minutes on a charge. And the handhelds with the DDM have a similarly short duration of use.

The Airblade hand dryers have mains motors fitted. The Japanese Dyson DC12 had a DDM in the top-range model. And one of the American Dyson cylinders had it too.

When Argos touted the DC11 cylinder, there were photos of DDM equipped models with remote power control on the hose handle. These never made it to the shelves. Only the conventional basic yellow model, and a HEPA model - both with conventional motors -were sold. I would like to know what exactly happened there. Did Argos goof, or did Dyson have a '12th hour' product rethink?

Post# 199882 , Reply# 106   9/7/2012 at 18:06 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

I think it will have been Dyson at fault there. Argos produce their catalogues months in advance. Dyson probably pulled out that model. Did I dream it, or was there not talk a good deal of years ago about a Dyson cylinder cleaner which had a diagnosis facility in the wheel and the user was expected to put the telephone next to the wheel to allow the message to be sent to the Dyson HQ?

Post# 199885 , Reply# 107   9/7/2012 at 18:10 (2,816 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

See reply #99.

Post# 199886 , Reply# 108   9/7/2012 at 18:18 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Hello Rolls. Great minds, I had totally missed your message about that, sorry. I can't believe I mentioned this just hours after you did, without realising you had done so already. So what did become of it? Did advances in internet and mobile telephones and such make this 'technology' redundant? Or was it just a feature too far?

Post# 199898 , Reply# 109   9/7/2012 at 19:28 (2,816 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
Having just seen the site earlier, the only upright listed as having 650 watts is the Dyson DC24. Pity the bin capacity is 0.85 litres though.

Post# 199904 , Reply# 110   9/7/2012 at 20:37 (2,816 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

I think the technology did work, but as usual, the UK didn't get it - it probably was too expensive for Joe Public.

I'm not entirely sure that the Japan and the US models had that communication feature. I can't be sure, they might have - but then again maybe I dreamt it.

Maybe the whole press release thing was an exercise in spin, to drum up interest and gauge response.

Post# 199932 , Reply# 111   9/8/2012 at 03:53 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Thank you Rolls. I think one has to draw a line under what is and what isn't worth it. A vacuum cleaner which could diagnose it's own motor fault is really a bit much, I mean the last thing on the mind of a consumer buying an expensive new cleaner is how easy it will be to tell the manufacturer what is wrong with it when it breaks down. I think that sometimes (though possibly rarely) even James Dyson can see some things are just too OTT.

Post# 199933 , Reply# 112   9/8/2012 at 03:58 (2,816 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        

gsheen's profile picture

Sebo fan , I agree with you, we reverted back to our old indesit dishwasher , I hate the electroic settings on the new ones, as if its not programmed in you can't do it.


I like our old indeset because you can manually move the timer along and do your own fast wash. PS I fitted a thermostat control to the element, That way I choose the heat setting myself. 


Personally I think they should go after washing machines dryers and dishwashers before vacuum cleaners, Think of it how long does your dryer run in a week ? 


To end it off all I can say Is I am sure glad i don't stay in the UK or Europe, I can't handle the nanny state 

Post# 199934 , Reply# 113   9/8/2012 at 04:17 (2,816 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Gary, If you lived here you would realise we are so far from being a nanny-state that words cannot describe the distance. The country is in a mess and people are generally doing what the hell they like. There have been massive cuts to our Police force, the NHS is going the same way, the idea that one does not have to work should one choose not to is rife, goodness knows where it will all end. If you think that your every day man on street is under the thumb of the law or the government, you can think again. In one sense, we've never had it so good when it comes to doing as one would please to.

So there may of course be suggestion that appliances and cars and such need to be more efficient, but most of it is all talk. As I said earlier, refrigeration has gone through major changes to the efficiency, but it has rarely being noted in the press. Washing machines have long been the target of energy consumption campaigns, with a huge push towards washing at lower temperatures. Washing powder companies have been on that band-wagon for a good deal of years. The problem is, as a nation it has been many years since our children were taught how to go through adult life responsibly, switching off anything which one is not using, and how to operate appliances efficiently. Not withstanding appliances like vacuum cleaners which often guzzle electricity from the word go, most energy consumption is not due to the power an appliance draws, but the way it is used and the amount of time it is on for and how often it is used.

Post# 199935 , Reply# 114   9/8/2012 at 05:31 (2,816 days old) by gsheen (Cape Town South Africa)        
Not law enforcement but rather heath and safety

gsheen's profile picture

One of my best friends is a product engineer, He is British by birth and has spent along time between the UK and USA working for various lawn appliance company's He now resides here in SA .


We were taliking about producs and saftey and he came with this slightly exaggerated but effective analogy. 


You stick your hands under the lawnmower while its running and to clear a blokage and chop off your fingers


USA you would go to court , sue the pants off the manufacturer for not having a Saflty lable on the lawnmower stating not to stick your hands under the lawn mower. Retire from your winnings. 



Take them to court sue the pants off them becaus helth and saftly let the manufacturermake such a dangouras device , health and safty would imediatly make a law stating that lawn mowers were to dangourous for your avarage consumer and could only be bought and operated  by professionally traind garden personal. 



Go to court were the Judge would stand up get off his bench and smack you across the head for been such a idiot.


This is not meant to offend anyone, It was a funny analogy put to me by a friend who has spent most of his life designing lawn appliances 

Post# 199936 , Reply# 115   9/8/2012 at 05:43 (2,816 days old) by uksausage (eastbourne east sussex UK)        
my bit

im no eco warrior at all i leave lights on all the time we leave the tv onin the lounge and the radio in the kitchen when we go out 4 ceiling fans running all the time (even in winter) i run 2 washing machines daily the animals machine only does boil washes and thats an uneco 15 year old zanussi my dryer gets used everyday as does the dishwasher i drink so much coffee during the day the kettle and the coffee machine only rest at night we both shower twice a day and i vacuum at least 3 times a day the main vacuum of the day usually takes around an hour as i have 6 cats and a dog that shed constantly (its a never ending battle in my house) i never use quick wash or 30 deg on the washing machine only 50,60 and 90 and my dishwasher only ever goes on at 70 deg after using all that power my vacuum i use daily is a 410 watt hoover turbo 1 ive tried all the others including a few 2400 watt machines and none seem to cope as well these new high powered machines need so much power because they have to draw the air through all these thick filters and bags i am quite asthmatic and the new machines with high power motors and so called hepa filters all make me sneeze and wheeze the old hoover turbo with cheap immitation bags doesnt affect me at all, i can normally tell how much power my appliances are pulling because i have one of those stupid key meters and i normally use about 30 a week compared to some i know who manage on 10 luckily my vacuum doesnt pull that much if the eu go ahead with this lower power thing it might not be such a bad thing everyone has their own opinions and ideas about appliances (bored now not gonna put anymore lol)


Post# 199937 , Reply# 116   9/8/2012 at 05:46 (2,816 days old) by uksausage (eastbourne east sussex UK)        
one more

just another of my low power vacuum lol


Post# 199943 , Reply# 117   9/8/2012 at 07:33 (2,816 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Inadvertently then, clearly other members are using low watt run vacuum cleaners - but apart from the Dyson DC24 which is currently on sale that uses a 650 watt motor, it must be a trying time for those who want to buy a brand new low power vacuum cleaner. Back in the day we all know that high power was used as a promotional selling point - the Hoover TP3 is an example in point - whereas previous classic lines had up to 575 watts, or less than 700 in the Hoover UK upright range, suddenly the "new" rating of 1000 watts was the next best thing to have. My point is, it doesn't matter how much power a vacuum cleaner has in terms of its USP, but back in the day, even 1000 watts was too high compared to what Hoover, Electrolux and others were previously producing in the upright range. The promise then of greater power with an 1000 watt motor could have been considered a waste on power - but back then as buyers we weren't conditioned to think about eco-motors and running costs.


Is it perhaps then, a little too late for brands to be given a law that stipulates low wattage, not just for vacuums alone but for the entire white appliance industry? I haven't even touched on toasters yet !





Post# 199969 , Reply# 118   9/8/2012 at 13:26 (2,815 days old) by vintagerepairer (England)        

Sebo-fan, I keep coming back to the same point, that in some instances high wattage means high energy consumption as the appliance is running for the duration of the job in hand -like a vacuum cleaner or a light bulb- whereas in other instances high-wattage means lower energy consumption because the higher wattage allows the end result to be achieved far more quickly, such as a powerful kettle which can heat a measure of water to boiling point (100 degrees) much more quickly that a slower kettle.

Gary, I am not the least bit offended by what you wrote, but I didn't laugh about it either as for me it is neither amusing or in any way factually accurate. We do have a lot of talk of Health and Safety, most of which could be attributed to both a genuine need for a safer lifestyle and also because more and more people are attempting to sue for damages. The biggest problem we are faced with is the continual H&S myths and stories which, thanks to text messaging and email, keep coming round and round again and again. A lot of it has little truth behind it, but people who have very little going on between the ears chose to believe it and tar all H&S issues with the same ill-informed brush. If we really were a nation who fussed so much about H&S then that poor woman in the city of London who was crushed to death last week by a window frame which had been removed and propped up in an area where she happened to be walking past.

We also have a whole arsenal of stupid people here who think it is entirely appropriate to make a rule to suit themselves and then say "it's because of Health and Safety". It's become one of the UK's stock-answers for people who are not especially clever and can think of nothing else to say when challenged. "It's data protection" is another one which trips off the tongue so very easily.

If you think also that we are fortunate to have effective laws that prevent certain activities being carried out by none-qualified personnel, you are again giving us undeserved credit. We have laws, we have regulations, but we also have a good deal of people who are only too happy to carry out work which they are not supposed to do, and it is almost impossible to check on who is doing what. Our shops are full of products which anyone can buy, even though a law or regulation prevents the purchaser from actually installing that product. It doesn't stop them doing it.

If I had the choice of living in a well-run country which was also a 'nanny state' then I would; it would be a small price to pay, because at the moment the not so Great Britain is on it's rear end.

Post# 199984 , Reply# 119   9/8/2012 at 15:55 (2,815 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
1000 Watt Uprights

I have no objection to a well designed clean-fan upright, which uses a 1000W motor. Electrolux and Hoover have made them in the past (Airstream, Turbopower 3). They were perfectly usable, had suitable suction power and were suited to a range of different surfaces and fabric types (NB: user-adjustable suction!), as well as having half decent on-board tools.

Nowadays you get a >2000W motor, no suction control, and Mickey Mouse tools that wouldn't complement any user scenario, let alone be suitable for a child's toy vacuum cleaner.

Post# 199996 , Reply# 120   9/8/2012 at 17:37 (2,815 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
I have no objection to any wattage - my argument is that back in the day 1000 watts could have been considered too high - but as consumers being eco-friendly was far from our minds at that point.

Benny - I will keep returning to the point that not everyone runs their vacuum daily and if they do it won't be for long periods - unless you live in a residential home, a hostel, a hotel, a B&B or any other commercial residence where traffic of people is a large number. Compared to the use of a fridge freezer, microwave, oven, kettle - even a hair dryer - all of which either use comparative or even higher wattage. That's my entire point - there's no need to worry about vacuum cleaner wattage when the existing appliances that are being used daily consume more power.

As for being quicker, I'd say I get a lot more done in dust pick up from my high wattage Sebo K1 2100 watt vacuum compared to say, a mains corded hand held vacuum whose suction runs out fairly quickly, but this could well be seen as "another variable."

Post# 199999 , Reply# 121   9/8/2012 at 17:50 (2,815 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

They don't use much at all. The induction motor is designed to work with low energy consumption. There may be frost-free defrosting which will consume a bit more electricity, but still much less than a two kiloWatt vacuum cleaner.

2000W in a hairdryer is ridiculous. Frazzled hair is bound to happen.
2000W in a vacuum is ridiculous. Torn curtains are bound to occur.

Post# 200338 , Reply# 122   9/11/2012 at 18:17 (2,812 days old) by floor-a-matic (somewhere)        

Why do today'svacuum cleaner motors need to have 12 AMPS? Older vacuums that have as little as 3 amps clean very well. I don't know why some people say that high-amp vacs outperform low-amp vacs; what REALLY makes a vac powerful is the ACTUAL DESIGN of the brush roller, nozzle & airflow or suction.

Post# 200453 , Reply# 123   9/12/2012 at 17:11 (2,811 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
In the same way that why do microwaves have to have the halo of 800 to 1000 watts when back in the 1970s, 400 watts was more than sufficient to heat up a cup of coffee or do quicker popcorn? Why do cars now still have gas guzzling engines despite eco-warnings and other brands offering eco-engines that don't have enough power to outrace a chasing cop car, but have better mileage.

As with those appliances, vacuums were much better built "back in the day," and in a more mass-level compared to the premium-expensive vacuums customers are made to believe are better built and designed- and in some cases they are. Unfortunately, it also means a higher power unless some brands offer eco-low power friendly models?

Post# 200457 , Reply# 124   9/12/2012 at 18:01 (2,811 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"you may as well be on about 1800 watt motors such as th

Yes, well, Miele has the good sense to fit variable power controls to their upright vacuums, so that curtains which are made of lightweight materials can be cleaned without damage. The same goes for delicate fabrics, such as silk lampshades, Chinese carpets, velour upholstery, brocade, etc.

Hoover and Electrolux used to fit variable power controls to their upright bagged cleaners, I can't understand why they no longer do so. It can't be cost, surely. I am left with the conclusion that it must be the lack of vision of the directors of both companies. The simple addition of a power control would make the machines much more usable.

Post# 200465 , Reply# 125   9/12/2012 at 18:39 (2,811 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

I say its cost too. Most bagged uprights are now considered budget class as all and sundry wants a bagless cleaner. Budget class means no bells and whistles, or power controls either. Most bagless cleaners are now multi-cyclonic which dont work very well at lower powers, hence no power controls. No Dysons have power controls either, and this makes them a real pain when using the hose due to recoiling. Interesting the way that canister cleaners usually have power controls though - I think this is more to do with the fact that some of the floorheads can be really difficult to move over carpets on high power.
I'm surprised actually that Sebo never put a power control on the X series, as that would have been very handy when using the hose and dusing brush, where the bristles tend to get sucked in on themselves and block the dirt passageway through the centre of the brush.

Post# 200466 , Reply# 126   9/12/2012 at 19:10 (2,811 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

I don't think it is cost. Cylinder cleaners have variable power, and manufacturers tend to churn them out ten-a-penny. No, something else is going on. I think it is lack of common sense, no vision and inexperience. Maybe it is apathy.

Who runs Hoover Floorcare, and who runs Electrolux Floorcare these days?

Post# 200469 , Reply# 127   9/12/2012 at 19:56 (2,811 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Not that I don't agree with you Calum, but I just had a thought - rating plates. They tell the truth between the base rating and the highest rating where watts are concerned. What does the S7 say to you? It doesn't matter what Miele state on the dial, the real power usage gets shown on the rating plate of minimum and maximum. What the vacuum has in total, is what the brand states -outwardly, but the rating plate indicates the base bands and so forth -  so even if you have a "low" marked power dial on the S7, it could well use 1600 watts as its lowest power band - but then you may find what occurs to me regularly with my Miele.


I much prefer having an air outlet valve on handles when it comes to using hoses on some vacuums where the "lowest" settings proves to be too high. It is often the case for my Miele S6 Ecoline, where after half the bag is full, there is little suction on the first level that is strong enough to pull up shredded paper, thus requiring the next step up which is then too strong and requires the air valve to be opened for a better, gentler compromise. None of Sebo's cylinders have air outlet valves on the handle - or Bosch base line cylinder vacs for that matter  - but they don't need them since it appears the continous suction dial allows for infinite adjustment compared to stepped increments.


Steve - I used to find that with the upholstery brush on the X series too - until I realised you're supposed to flatten the brush out on surfaces for dusting so that the inner plastic wall (castle cut/edged for a reason) allows the suction to pull the dust off from the bristles. Miele's round brushes clog up and they also have an improved inner wall made up of a round "wavy" pattern of plastic - but I find they clog up more due to their smaller suction hole diameter; A possible reason to why Sebo retained the triangular design for the new D cylinders/canisters as the dust channel is bigger.


I think most brands have ceased power controls on uprights because they feel it would snatch sales away from their cylinder vacuum ranges - particularly if they have low sales anyway and are trying to push cylinders more than uprights. A classic example of this is Panasonic - and I've just purchased a low power 1300 watt cylinder Panasonic cylinder vac. It has variable suction on it and has a far more modern design than Pan's current UK upright bagged vacuums that only seem to increase year after year by 100 watts with nothing else added but a new colour to promote it. 


There are only a few brands out there who offer variable suction on uprights, because sales are healthy for both types of vacs they sell. Or, that's the way it appears to me.

Post# 200473 , Reply# 128   9/12/2012 at 20:40 (2,811 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

The only two uprights I have with variable suction are my Miele S7510, and Sanyo SCA-7, which is a fair few years old, and a re-badged Panasonic of that time period. The Miele S6 is a very good canister for variable control, but has an adverse effect on the turbobrush rotation if the suction is turned down too low though. I think that one of the reasons why uprights dont have the power control is that most have only one motor for the suction and it drives the brushroll as well. If the power is reduced then the brushroll will spin slower too, possibly becoming jammed or stopped easier which would damage the motor. The S7 has a seperate brush motor so this spins the brushes at a constant speed regardless of the power of the suction motor. However - the lower power is only usually needed when using the tools so I cant see much of a problem in that respect.
Dyson dont offer power control on any of their canisters and some of the more budget range canisters dont either like the VAX essentials range.
The Henry has 2 speed motor control, but cheaper models like the James and the Basil didnt, and in the Henry, this autosave feature has only come about recently. Before 2006, I think even the Henry was only 1 speed.
I'm sure penny pinching has a lot to do with it as many companies are going this way since the recession to cut costs and maximise profits. Look at the Hoover TP1 compared to the Ranger or PowerPlus - after the recession of the early 80's, Hoover needed to cut costs so produced cleaners a lot cheaper in quality with all plastic and very little metal.
Incidentally, not many dirty fan models had power control - it was only something that appeared on the later clean air models after about 1983 starting with the famous Hoover sensotronic - now that was a cool cleaner for gadgets and lights.

Post# 200474 , Reply# 129   9/12/2012 at 20:49 (2,811 days old) by madabouthoovers ()        

Sebo-fan - having just looked at the triangular dusting brush for my X4 Extra, it doesnt have a castellated or serrated edge to the inner walls of the brush, they are flat all the way round. The Miele brush does have the inner walls as you describe though. Perhaps you have a different dusting brush for your Sebo. Mine has quite long bristles which completely enclose the centre section of the brush when suction is applied to it, and when cleaning up cat hairs, they all sick in the centre of the brush. Whilst I use the Sebo as a daily driver, there are some things about it that arent well designed and the brush is one of them. The fact that they use a 36.5 mm fitting and most of my other tools are either 32 or 35mm pees me off a little too as I feel that Sebo only do this so you have to pay them for their tools and you cant use anyone elses.

Post# 200501 , Reply# 130   9/13/2012 at 04:31 (2,811 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

Steve - I use the smaller dusting brush on my X1 - but I will agree, dusting brushes in general aren't well designed - they either lack brushes or have too much. 


However, even if Sebo do supply a different fitting - at least their tools can be used on every single model that Sebo produce - unlike Dyson.


On another note, I thought Dyson had variable suction on some of their past cylinder vacuums, or has it always been fixed? I consider most of Vax's range to be budget, but since you like the cheap of the cheap, it's no surprise to see Vax have fixed suction in their Essentials range. The Argos Value "fabric filter bagless" cylinder vac (and previously a Proaction label) does have variable suction, so it is possible to use it on the cheapest priced vacuum. 

Post# 200595 , Reply# 131   9/13/2012 at 19:39 (2,810 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

Having power controls on uprights is not a black art - they've done it before and can do it again. The Electrolux 612 had a power control that you could turn down to a whisper and it still picked up dust. Very quiet it was too. Also a slower agitator can improve performance. Fast spinning brushes don't improve performance. (This has been talked about on a previous thread, where a member's grandfather's upright Panasonic was compared to an older or newer Panasonic with the same brush. The newer high-wattage model skipped across the surface; the older one groomed to a better standard. Further conversation also took place about Hoover and their disappearing 'Activator' nodules on the Purepowers).

Any modern vacuum data plate that I have seen, for example, states the Voltage (220-240V), and the Wattage (900-1000W). The 900W refers to the machine being used on a 220V circuit, as in Europe. The 1000W refers to being used on the British 240V system. You might even get a little boost in performance when the voltage rises to nearer 250V - as it can do. (This was apparently, the reason for the recent UK Bosch dishwasher recall, where the pcb couldn't tolerate over-voltage).

Post# 200754 , Reply# 132   9/15/2012 at 04:23 (2,809 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture

I think having a variably controlled brush roll can just complicate things, although it is a good idea in theory. If it did exist on previous upright vacuums, then kudos to the brand for fitting it. 


TBH though, when I think about some past uprights I've owned, a variable suction control on the handle wouldn't really justify the power - the Oreck XL for example would struggle to supply enough puff without getting constantly clogged IF it had a low suction setting having to push enough air from its motor to blast the dust up the spine and into its massive dust bags. This reminds me of my old Electrolux Z517 where dust used to get clogged right at the top of the dust bag and stuck to the dust channel hole at the top of the bag. The orange Electrolux Z500 was better in this respect, but then I think it had a more powerful motor and proper variable suction as opposed to the daft air outlet slider/combined tool mount.




Post# 200836 , Reply# 133   9/15/2012 at 21:46 (2,808 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
"If it did exist on previous upright vacuums..."

Of course it existed.

I honestly don't know where the trouble is in understanding that a suction motor fitted with variable speed control, also allows the belt driven agitator (on the same motor) to be similarly regulated. Thus, full suction power equals full agitator revolutions, and lowest suction power equates to the slowest agitator rotation.

Electrolux 612 & Airstream 1000: fully variable power regulator.
Selected Hoover Turbopowers had two-speed motors (Hi & Lo).
Turbopower 2 & 3 had three speeds (low power: green lamp, medium power: amber lamp, full power: red lamp).

Have you never used an upright with variable speed control?

Post# 200851 , Reply# 134   9/16/2012 at 08:31 (2,808 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
There's no "trouble in understanding." I have owned TP2 and TP3's that had the variably controlled brush roll via the preset buttons/rocker switches/whatever. My Dirt Devil Turbopower 2/3 with its 1100 watt motor had a variable suction control dial too. However, I find the whole idea ever so slightly pointless when a brush roll speeds up or slows down. If there's more suction available from a slide control or however you wish to use the idea, then that should be sufficient. Regulating the speed of the brush roll in my experience complicates things. There really isn't any need for it - another thing or issue that takes out more life out of the drive belt - and also having to put up with an increase of noise.

Post# 200874 , Reply# 135   9/16/2012 at 13:53 (2,807 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        

I don't think that there is any complication in agitator speed regulation.

Lesser suction power and correspondingly slower agitator speed is fine for lightweight rugs and mats.

Lower speed also means less noise - from both the air path and the agitator. "Which?" even commented on it decades ago, saying that a simple hose vent increases noise, whereas a speed control reduces noise.

Post# 200914 , Reply# 136   9/16/2012 at 19:15 (2,807 days old) by sebo_fan (Scotland, UK, member AKA ukvacfan, & Nar2)        

sebo_fan's profile picture
I think its far more simplistic to offer just variable suction and nothing more. I can recall my TP2 in the low mode had a tendency to clog on pet hair whenever the slow brush roll was used with the low suction. Far easier to just have a quicker brush roll speed and allow the low suction to deposit the dust into the bag. Hoover could have fitted a brush stop function whenever the vacuum was used for its hose in the upright position to save wear on the belt.

However, one must be prepared to know that the Panasonic uprights have never had height adjustment, only using the science of vacuum air between the floor head and the carpet to adjust gliding automatically. Therefore the only variable that exists is the difference between what the previous thread seems to claim that the pick up performance is better from the old model. What I don't know is if the brush rolls are different - having had Panasonic in the past, the current beater bristle bars are horribly thin bristles compared to the thicker brush roll that was fitted to my base white MC E41N. Thus, it could have been a contributing factor to offering better performance, not just guaranteed by a lower suction AND lower brush roll speed.

Post# 201016 , Reply# 137   9/17/2012 at 16:52 (2,806 days old) by Rolls_rapide (-)        
Panasonic MC-E40 Series

The original agitator for the MC-E40s was a helical beater bar and arranged opposite it by 180, was a bristle brush. The edge brushes were soft 'fringed circles'.

They redesigned it to be the more modern sparsely populated, twin helix brush, and broken beater bars. The edge brushes on this one are similar to the rest of the agitator - sparse clumps. I had this one fitted when the original wore down on the belt pulley area, a couple of years after buying the machine.

I got the impression from that particular thread, that the same agitator was used in both the old slower machine, as well as the new quicker one. The comments went along the lines of: the modern machine was skimming over the surface of the carpet pile, whereas the slower machine correctly lifted the pile.

Forum Index:       Other Forums:                      

Comes to the Rescue!

Woops, Time to Check the Bag!!!
Either you need to change your vacuum bag or you forgot to LOG-IN?

Discuss-O-MAT Log-In

New Members
Click Here To Sign Up.

Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals
Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy